Our Work

Tezisda “yashil” tadbirkorlikni rivojlantirishda sun’iy intellektga asoslangan texnologik yechimlarning resurs samaradorligini oshirishdagi ahamiyati yoritilgan. Sun’iy intelle…

Tezisda “yashil” tadbirkorlikni rivojlantirishda sun’iy intellektga asoslangan texnologik yechimlarning resurs samaradorligini oshirishdagi ahamiyati yoritilgan. Sun’iy intellekt texnologiyalaridan foydalanish orqali energiya, suv, xomashyo va materiallar sarfini optimallashtirish, resurs yo‘qotishlarini kamaytirish hamda ekologik va iqtisodiy samaradorlikni oshirish imkoniyatlari tahlil qilingan. Shuningdek, sun’iy intellekt asosida prognozlash, monitoring va resurslarni optimal taqsimlash mexanizmlaridan foydalanishning “yashil” tadbirkorlik subyektlari uchun istiqbolli yo‘nalishlari asoslangan.

Vrouwen die coercive control hebben meegemaakt, beschrijven vaak een tweede ervaring. De instanties die hen moesten beschermen, maakten hun situatie soms zwaarder: ze werden niet geloofd, hun zorgen w…

Vrouwen die coercive control hebben meegemaakt, beschrijven vaak een tweede ervaring. De instanties die hen moesten beschermen, maakten hun situatie soms zwaarder: ze werden niet geloofd, hun zorgen werden als ruzie gelezen, of zij kregen maatregelen opgelegd. In mijn werk als vertrouwenspersoon zie ik in dossiers een verloop dat vaak terugkomt. Deze kenniskaart beschrijft dat verloop als een reeks systeemfasen. De fasen lopen verrassenderwijs parallel met de fasen uit het model van criminologe Jane Monckton Smith, die acht fasen vond in de aanloop naar partnerdoding in de coercive control dynamiek. Mijn claim is dat het slachtoffer van coercive control opnieuw slachtoffer wordt (secundaire victimisatie) door systemisch onrecht (system abuse) en dat dit in voorspelbare fasen gebeurt. Deze kaart introduceert een hypothese zodat geïnteresseerden, professionals en ervaringsdeskundigen hun feedback en appreciatie kunnen geven. Als u iets herkent, of juist niet, hoor ik dat graag.

Lightweight dependency management and lazy loading for scientific Python libraries.

This Zenodo record is a permanently preserved version of a PREreview. You can view the complete PREreview at https://prereview.org/reviews/22975570. This manuscript describes a chemically defined, fi…

This Zenodo record is a permanently preserved version of a PREreview. You can view the complete PREreview at https://prereview.org/reviews/22975570. This manuscript describes a chemically defined, five-component cocktail (PRBJN) that rapidly and efficiently converts naïve human PSCs into 8-cell-like cells (ri8CLCs), reaching up to ~40% TPRX1-positive cells within 48 hours — a substantial improvement in speed and yield over previously reported approaches. The chemical screening strategy is systematic and well executed, and the transcriptomic and chromatin-accessibility characterization (bulk RNA-seq, ATAC-seq, and single-cell RNA-seq with reference mapping to human embryo datasets) provides reasonably convincing evidence that PRBJN-treated cells acquire an 8-cell/ZGA-like transcriptional identity. The functional data — accelerated blastoid formation, spontaneous trophoblast differentiation, and enhanced chimeric contribution to both ICM and TE in mouse embryos — are the most compelling and potentially high-impact aspects of the study, suggesting genuinely expanded developmental competence rather than a purely transcriptional phenocopy. That said, several of the paper's central functional claims are not yet adequately supported by the data shown, and the manuscript would benefit substantially from additional controls before publication. Most importantly: (1) the immunofluorescence panel intended to demonstrate trilineage blastoid identity (Fig. 5M) does not match its own figure legend and does not show the markers described in the text, so the core claim of blastocyst-like lineage segregation is currently unsubstantiated; (2) nearly all functional assays (blastoid formation, trophoblast differentiation, chimera injection) use bulk, unsorted PRBJN-treated populations rather than sorted TPRX1+ cells, leaving open whether the reported phenotypes are attributable to the 8CLC state specifically or to direct pharmacological effects of the compounds; and (3) no genomic integrity data are provided despite the induction protocol combining a p53 agonist with broad chromatin-modifying compounds. These issues, together with several smaller inconsistencies in timing, controls, and comparisons to prior work detailed below, should be addressed. With these revisions, this could be a strong and useful contribution to the field; as it stands, the functional claims outpace the evidence provided. Major issues 1. Blastoid lineage identity is inadequately supported, and Figure 5M does not match its own legend. The Figure 5M legend states that blastoids were stained for NANOG (epiblast), SOX17 (hypoblast/primitive endoderm), and GATA3-mKO2 (trophectoderm). However, the panel itself is labeled DAPI / KLF17 / GATA3-mKO2 / MERGE — neither NANOG nor SOX17 appears anywhere in the figure. The main text (line 299) likewise states that blastoids contain "inner cells expressing NANOG," which is not what is actually shown; KLF17 is an 8CLC/ZGA marker, not a canonical epiblast marker. Beyond this discrepancy, no hypoblast marker is shown at all, and GATA3 and KLF17 appear to co-localize in the ri8CLC panel rather than mark spatially distinct compartments. As it stands, the manuscript does not demonstrate that ri8CLC-derived blastoids contain the three lineages required to support the claim of faithful blastocyst-like structure. This needs to be corrected (matching stains to the legend) and, at minimum, supplemented with proper epiblast/hypoblast/TE triple staining before the claim can be considered supported. 2. Functional lineage potential of ri8CLC-blastoids is untested. Can epiblast-, hypoblast-, and trophectoderm-derived cell lines actually be established from ri8CLC-blastoids upon appropriate seeding? Morphological cavitation and marker expression are necessary but not sufficient evidence of a bona fide blastocyst-like structure; functional derivation of the three lineages would substantiate the claim far more convincingly. 3. The functional assays confound "8CLC state" with direct compound pharmacology, and this is not controlled for. All blastoid formation, trophoblast differentiation, and chimera injection experiments appear to use bulk, unfractionated PRBJN-treated cells (12–24 h), not sorted TPRX1+ populations. This leaves open the possibility that the enhanced developmental phenotypes are driven directly by PY60/Nutlin-3a/retinoic-acid signaling on cells that never passed through an 8C-like state, rather than by genuine transit through totipotency. Sorting TPRX1+ vs. TPRX1– fractions and testing each for blastoid/trophoblast/chimera competence would be the key experiment to resolve this, and its absence is a significant gap in the causal argument the paper makes. 4. No genomic or cellular integrity data are provided for a demonstrably stressful induction protocol. PRBJN combines a p53 activator (Nutlin-3a/MDM2i) with two KDM inhibitors that broadly remodel chromatin (over 52,000 ATAC-seq regions altered). Given this, and given the paper's stated ambition as a scalable induction platform, the absence of karyotyping, DNA-damage marker analysis (e.g., γH2AX), or comet assay data is a meaningful omission that should be addressed before the platform is presented as broadly usable. 5. Persistence and sortability of the TPRX1+ state are not characterized. Can TPRX1+ cells be isolated and maintained, or do they rapidly revert/lose the 8C signature once sorted? This bears directly on both the platform's practical utility and on resolving concern #3 above (whether developmental competence tracks with 8CLC identity specifically, or with bulk treatment). 6. Treatment duration is inconsistent across assays without justification. The manuscript uses at least three different treatment windows for its key readouts — 12 h (blastoid formation, chimera injection), 24 h (scRNA-seq, trophoblast differentiation), and 48 h (bulk RNA-seq/TPRX1 sorting, where the strongest 8C transcriptional signature is reported). No rationale is given for why each assay uses a different timepoint, and it is not clear that "peak 8CLC identity" (48 h) is the state actually being tested functionally (12–24 h). This should be explicitly justified or reconciled. 7. No direct comparison against Li et al. (spliceosome inhibition) or Mazid et al. induction protocols. The scRNA-seq reference-mapping analysis does include the Mazid dataset (Fig. 4F–G), but only as a low-dimensional embedding/label-transfer comparison — not a direct correlation of induction signatures, as the authors do for DUX4 vs. PY60 (Fig. 2F). Given that PRBJN's chemical logic (chromatin/p53/RA-based) is entirely distinct from spliceosome inhibition (Li et al.) or the Mazid protocol, a quantitative transcriptomic comparison of the induced states would substantially strengthen (or complicate) the claim that these represent convergent, or distinct, routes to the same 8C-like identity. 8. Can ri8CLC reproduce Li et al.'s fully spontaneous blastoid formation? Since PRBJN already renders MEK inhibition, Nodal/Activin inhibition, and LIF dispensable, and LPA remains the only required PALLY component, it is a natural extension to test whether LPA can also be omitted — matching Li et al.'s report of fully spontaneous blastoid formation. This seems a low-effort, high-value control given the omission experiments the authors already performed (Fig. 5L). 9. Epigenetic characterization is limited to chromatin accessibility. ATAC-seq and motif enrichment are informative but shallow relative to the paper's mechanistic claims about chromatin barriers. DNA methylation and histone modification data (e.g., H3K4me3, given the JQKD82/KDM5 mechanism proposed in the Discussion) would substantially strengthen the mechanistic narrative, though this is lower priority than the functional/validation gaps above. 10. Possible confound between p53/stress response and genuine ZGA-like signature. The TP53-KO experiment (Fig. S2) shows that Nutlin-3a's TPRX1-inducing effect is p53-dependent, but does not establish whether the "ZGA-like" signature seen with the full PRBJN cocktail is specifically an 8C-like program or partly a generic p53/stress-response transcriptional signature. Comparing GSEA specificity with and without Nutlin-3a in the cocktail would help distinguish these possibilities. Minor issues Lines 64–65: Add a sentence or two explicitly linking "chromatin-associated processes" to the specific epigenetic regulator classes screened, to better motivate the screen's design for readers.Line 85 / Fig. S1E: The KLF17 result appears inconsistent with the other 8CLC markers shown — worth flagging or explaining in the text.Line 89: Specify which naïve culture condition was used for the primary screen.Choice of culture conditions: Given the number of established naïve conditions, the manuscript would benefit from briefly justifying the choice of HENSM for both screening and PALLY-based blastoid formation, since the PALLY protocol was not originally developed in HENSM.Figure 1A: With multiple HDAC inhibitors among the hits, consider labeling them explicitly so readers can distinguish why compounds with stronger raw TPRX1+ induction were not prioritized over PY60.Figure 4A: Report the percentage of cells in cluster 4, and indicate whether it is comparable to the %TPRX1+ measured by FACS.Figure 4: Report the quantitative overlap between TPRX1+ cells and cluster 4 assignment.Line 247: The phrase "cluster 4 and TPRX1-positive cells" is ambiguous — clarify whether this refers to two distinct but overlapping groups, or a single population.Line 258: "Predominantly" somewhat overstates the label-transfer result as shown; consider softening or quantifying precisely. Competing interests The author declares that they have no competing interests. Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) The author declares that they did not use generative AI to come up with new ideas for their review.

Major improvements for interpolation matrix. Full Changelog: https://github.com/scientificcomputing/scifem/compare/v0.16.1...v0.16.0

Background and Objectives: By allowing a voter to collectively reject all candidates while keeping the secrecy of their choices, the "None of the Above" (NOTA) option was introduced into India's elect…

Background and Objectives: By allowing a voter to collectively reject all candidates while keeping the secrecy of their choices, the "None of the Above" (NOTA) option was introduced into India's elections. In the context of India's single-member plurality electoral system, this paper examines NOTA and evaluates the claim that, under certain conditions of competition, it may offer indirect support to those already in office. Methodology: In order to understand the issues regarding strategic voting, protest behaviour, vote margins, incumbency, and electoral competition, the current study uses a literature review of secondary sources from 2014 to 2026 that include research papers, election surveys, books, and book chapters on Indian elections. Key Findings: In the literature review, it is found that NOTA gives voters an extended platform for expressing their preferences and makes blank votes a way of protest; however, people choosing NOTA do not compete for seats. When votes for NOTA are concentrated in closely contested constituencies, they can affect the outcome of elections without necessarily penalising the sitting office-holder. Nevertheless, the impact of NOTA is found to be variable, depending on the competitiveness of the constituency and the behaviour of voters and candidates. Conclusion and Significance: NOTA should therefore be seen as both an outlet for protest and a potentially asymmetric instrument in elections, with its impact varying according to the level of competition and the behaviours of participants.

No description provided.

Russia’s national internet filtering system places centrally controlled inspection equipment inside privately operated networks. This report examines how TSPU (Technical Means of Countering Thre…

Russia’s national internet filtering system places centrally controlled inspection equipment inside privately operated networks. This report examines how TSPU (Technical Means of Countering Threats) combines deep packet inspection with legal mandates, licensing requirements, public investment, and domestic technology suppliers to sustain state control over internet access. Drawing on regulatory documents, procurement records, operator accounts, industry discussions, and independent network measurements, the report explains how filtering works, how it changes operator autonomy, and how blocking, throttling, and approved-access lists affect users. It examines the pressures on circumvention services, including app distribution and payment barriers, and the integration of filtering with surveillance and network-security functions. Written for civil society organisations, advocates, and researchers, the report also considers the cross-border effects of Russian filtering and the potential replication of its institutional model elsewhere. It identifies opportunities for action through standards governance, procurement accountability, independent measurement, and early warning of regulatory changes.

Abstract: India has made A.I. adoption and native A.I. innovation a priority. However, rapid adoption and growth without a safety framework can lead to harm. Although standards to measure safety and r…

Abstract: India has made A.I. adoption and native A.I. innovation a priority. However, rapid adoption and growth without a safety framework can lead to harm. Although standards to measure safety and reduce biasin A.I. have been researched in the West, these recommendations need to be adapted to address India’s digital landscape. This paper aims to contribute to the growing body of knowledge on the practical implementation of A.I. safety measures across a diverse digital landscape. In the paper, we examine various areas where A.I. can cause harm. First, we examine biases that enter code and algorithms. Second, applying Young’s five faces of oppression, we identify different forms of oppression in A.I. Third, we examine the Indian digital landscape to understand why its diversity requires a tailored safety framework and unique guardrails to mitigate bias. The paper concludes by recommending pathways that will enable Indian innovators to create Responsible Artificial Intelligence and applications that will adhere to safety standards while reducing instances of exploitation.

Russia’s TSPU (Technical Means of Countering Threats) is a centrally managed internet filtering system deployed within operators’ networks. This technical advisory examines its architectur…

Russia’s TSPU (Technical Means of Countering Threats) is a centrally managed internet filtering system deployed within operators’ networks. This technical advisory examines its architecture, documented blocking behaviours, and implications for circumvention tool development, network measurement, and digital security training. Drawing on independent measurements, operator accounts, technical documentation, and regulatory sources, the report explains inline deployment, the hardware and software stack, and controls across DNS, network, transport, and application layers. It examines protocol detection, traffic fingerprinting, throttling, approved-access restrictions, and the relationship between filtering, surveillance, and network-security functions. Throughout, it distinguishes advertised capabilities, reported practices, and observed behaviour. The advisory translates these findings into considerations for tool design and deployment, including protocol diversity, infrastructure exposure, configuration updates, user onboarding, and measurement across different networks. It also identifies public sources for tracking the system’s development. Protocol assessments reflect the evidence available for this edition and require continued testing as filtering changes.